Wednesday, April 26, 2017

What's Wrong With The Future?

Pardon my absence. I've been off getting in different kinds of trouble, away from this blog - and from some of my old hangouts. Bigger targets, more aggressive aims, work and life. That kind of thing.

But I poked my head back in to see that What's Wrong With the World is having a kind of post-defeat spasm, where they look around and what amounts to the ashes of an intellectual kingdom (in which they had, at best, a tiny fiefdom) and do their best to try and look all noble in spite of it all.

You know the drill. Woe and lament, but yet we persevere! For we are the Purehearted (ecumenical!) Knights of the Lord God, and we shall fight against Evil wherever it lay, and Lo' the Lord shall look upon us with our glorious *sneering* and... blah, blah, blah.

Bullshit, in other words.

But let me zero in on the juiciest bit.

I’m proud to be associated with my W4 co-contributors because they are such men. May their tribe increase, and may we be able to see, ten years further on, how we contributed to its increase.
First, I note the irony of the invocation of 'may your tribe increase', among people whose hallmark is 'regarding those who value their "tribe" to be wicked and evil'.

But more than that...  'increasing your tribe' is the one thing this lot - the entire "respectable, Old Guard conservative" lot - has been utterly incapable of doing... pretty much ever. As Vox Day has pointed out, conservatives conserve nothing in America. The left has stolen, one after the other, their corporations, their churches, and their culture. (Even Archie Comics is converged, for Christ's sake.) The alt-right and Trump right, meanwhile, has stolen their party, their voice, and - with the exception of the ones the SJWs stole - their children.

You can easily identify the sort of people who W4 represents, at any mixed conservative gathering. Just ask: "Who in the audience is post-menopause or can't get an erection without a pill?"

There's their tribe, ladies and gentlemen. Everyone else is going in a different direction. The children of the W4-styled tribe have left, either identifying as pangendered, or sharing dank memes on the internet.

That is where all their enemies have come from - some of the wicked and evil they're warring against know them as "mom" and "dad". Maybe it's painful to cop to, but I assure you... the brand of conservatism these guys are selling, has failed completely. Finally - if suddenly - they've even been robbed of the intellectual legitimacy they used to have, and they are not going to reclaim it. I've urged them to ask why that is the case, but time and experience has told me that THAT is what they'd really die than do.

The good news for the rest of us is - we now have alternatives. We continue to fight, we find new friends, new tactics, and for the first time in a long time there's something new - and good - in the air. Don't worry too much about those clinging to the corpse of Buckley. They'll be fine - coping with losing is one thing they've actually managed to get good at.


Mike said...

Their posts about Athenians versus Visigoths or whichever overwrought dichotomy they used is ironically appropriate in light of the black bloc-lead riots of late. The modern "Athenians" are not in the ivory tower. They're the men out there beating back the antifa and the men willing to do the same if the antifa roll into their community and trash the public peace like that.

Crude said...

Well, in the sick heads of W4, the right, manly, and proper thing to do when violent thugs threaten your speech is to acquiesce but write a positively *snarky* complaint. Not to actually, you know... demand the right to speak at a public university.

The world has passed them by already. In the end, one thing Wrong With the World was W4.

Mike said...

I just read the blog post you were referring to here. I thought you were referring to an older one. Am I wrong in thinking that I'm still living rent free in their heads? Because that post felt a lot like "let's discuss him without directly saying his name because if we do that, he'll appear in a cloud of brimstone."

Mike said...

Looks like Vox Day has a timeshare there as well. What is it about women today and being seen "taking stands against bullies?" I feel like it's really become a thing of late.

Anonymous said...

Hey Crude,

Here is the comment that I just submitted on the most recent W4 post. Whether it gets approved or not, we will see.


The fact is, it was under the watch of the "conservatives" described in this [W4] essay that the progressives made all their advances and the Churches became liberalized and weak. Why this was the case, I do not know, but it was. Is it any surprise then that modern men on the right might look at such conservativism as something weak and ineffective. Of course not! Men are perfectly rational to see it as such.

Whatever the reason, the fact is that there is something weak and submissive at the heart of so-called "conservativism"; indeed, when the going gets tough, the conservatives (or at least those perceived to be conservative) get going. Case in point: Ann Coulter's speech that was just cancelled. When things got tough, and just the threat of violence was mentioned, the "give-me-liberty-or-give-me-death" conservatives and Republicans who had sponsored Coulter actually turned out to be "give-me-safety-and-security" nanny-state conservatives. And that is why men will now move towards the Alt-West, the Alt-Right, and towards nationalists, for at least these groups won't back down at the first sign of a threat to the "safety" of their "community".

My prediction: Modern conservatives are the Whigs. They will be whittled down soon to insignificance by portions of the right that actually fight the left on any terms that are necessary, not just verbally 'tut-tut' about them, like Buckley and his cohort did for two generations.


The truth is, I know a few former conservatives who now hate that label given that they know that in practice it actually means cuckservative. As such, such "conservatives" now call themselves nationalists or traditionalists or something else, but they are definitely no longer conservatives!


Damian Michael

Crude said...


I think the 'living inside their heads' thing is apt, and it's a lot of people doing it. Really, these past two years have been the stuff of cultural/political whiplash for a lot of people. W4 had a tremendous psychological investment in Trump losing - first in the primaries, and then in the general election. To have him win, and then to do *admirable* things by their standards (Gorsuch, the abortion moves, etc) has devastated them. Just imagine the sort of mental torment Lydia herself has to be enduring when Mr Grab-them-by-the-pussy signs laws that screw with Planned Parenthood.

The bullies thing is especially funny, since Lydia herself is a tremendously nasty piece of work with little provocation - and that's not exactly news to anyone who's interacted with her.


Oh man, let me know if they let that through. Once upon a time I think they would, just to attack you, but nowadays I expect that sort of comment to get holed. I suspect they're not letting you show up, call them failures, and then praise the alt-right for long. Especially since it's bang-on accurate.

One thing W4 - and conservatives in general - love to do is whine that they're 'standing for their principles!' That's hard to buy, considering how many times they sacrifice those very things when the going gets tough. You yourself notice how YAF and crew folded like laundry. I think they're confusing 'concern with principle' with 'concern for their image and their standing'. It ain't noble to fight like crazy to protect your *image*.

Mike said...

Read this article by Andrew Klavan. I think it does a good job of explaining a lot of the fears that conservatives had/have about Trump, but to Klavan's credit he seems to have moved firmly into a realistic position on Trump (accepts he's a flawed man and believes he must support Trump when Trump fights for the right, no matter what he thinks of him personally). (Side prediction: in 5 years, Klavan will be relevant, W4-style types will not)

I think the post-Christian aspect of Trump is actually a feature in disguise that a lot of these folks missed. Trump ran, more or less, as a non-Christian. Trump has never made a point of trying to corrupt Christianity to advance his agenda. Trump is also, so far, not hostile to Christianity. In fact, Trump so far seems a better ally to social conservative Christians than most "Christian" politicians. Trump respects loyalty, and while some Catholics may be getting pissed at him not lifting a finger to help on the birth control mandate, he hasn't forgotten the evangelicals who made him a primary powerhouse.

Contrast all of that with mainstream liberals. They're always trying to No True Christian their opponents. Their approach is literally satanic in how much they use blatant heresy as a weapon. Trump, to his credit, seems to be totally disinterested in manipulating any Christian denomination's theology to make an argument. So if Trump starts a trend that hurts the religious left and makes it easier for conservative Christians to spend time doing more than fighting heresy fires, I say good on him.

Crude said...

Some fast thoughts on Klavan's article.

First, I think it's funny that Klavan suggests Jews are worried and scared that we elected a 'post-Christian president'. I humbly suggest religious Jews don't give a fig whether others worship what they regard as a false (and maybe even historically threatening) religion.

Second, leftism as 'Christianity without Christ' is one of those limp-wristed criticism-but-a-compliment that is also wrong-headed. The fact that they worship at the feet of Soros, a multi-billionaire zombie whose saving grace is that he tithes to their causes, says a lot. They don't care about the poor - they exploit them. They see causes as good cover to advance their own agendas. The number of stories about intraparty fighting among the various victim groups, as each tries to hijack the other's meeting for their own agenda, is tremendous.

I do think there is this ongoing view among many Christians that leftism - or at least emotional sentiment - is the next best thing to Christ, and that emotional histrionics about 'justice' make for a good placeholder for Christianity. It's a lot like saying that, well, we can't convert people to Christianity. But maybe convincing them that idolatry is valid will be the next best thing.

I disagree. There's a better way.

Anonymous said...

Hey Crude,

It has been a full day, and there have been multiple other comments posted at W4, but mine is still in limbo. Not surprising. But I have to say, there is something deeply ironic about making a comment essentially accusing W4-type conservatives of being wimps and cowards, and then having such conservatives censor the comment so that they don't even have to deal with it. And I know it's their blog and all that, but I still think the optics of the whole thing are quite telling.


Damian Michael

Crude said...

Haha. Yeah, I had a feeling they weren't going to be too happy about that comment. Especially since the whole point of their last couple posts has been to valiantly, dramatically cast themselves as noble, upstanding people who are doing the right thing and are absolutely NOT wrong. Not a parade they want rain on.

I'm quite banned from there myself!

Amos Bellomy said...

I have several issues with the alt-right, but the real irony that the W4 guys would *hate* is that they're extraordinarily similar to the criticisms I have of American right liberalism generally.

They think they're extra specially good. They're not. They're just wrong in slightly different ways, at least from my perspective.

(Amos Bellomy is Malcolm the Cynic - if I want to use that persona I need to continually log out and log back in again, and that's too much of a pain as far as I'm concerned).

Mike said...


In all seriousness, do you not get the feeling that she was thinking of a sort of strawman that is a hybrid of you and me when she wrote that post? There are a lot of indirect references to my behavior and change in perspective, but some of that seems to apply to you as well.

Amos Bellomy said...


Didn't even click on the link. I'd rather not get my blood pressure up.

Crude said...

I think clearly W4 is taking aim specifically at their combox detractors, who have at this point made their opinion of that lot clear.

As for the alt-right, I've got issues with 'em too. I have issues with everyone. What gets me is that I think the alt-right is making apt observations at times, and pleading justified cases at times as well. And, here's what's crucial: their observations and demands are not being made by anyone else.

The standard conservatives at this point are afraid to say 'White people have every right to look out for their interests.' Now, the typical reply is, 'Well identity politics is a left-wing thing! We're not dirty liberals like the alt-right, we reject identity politics!' Except, that's bullshit. Tell me the NAACP should cease to exist, and that black people talking about 'worries of the black community' are bullshit because 'black community' is racial and inferior (!!!) thinking - we should really think in terms of 'all Americans'. It's not happening, which means the shit about the hatred of identity groups is insincere. They don't even attempt to explain this discrepancy, and it's easy to see why: to do so would be to copy a page straight out of the most crazy liberal political books.

Really, the alt-right (particularly their religious wing) does a better job of identifying 'What's Wrong With the World' than W4 does. The best part is, for all W4's sneering, Lydia in particular would get Milo'd in a second if anyone cared about what she said. I honestly hope she gets nominated for some kind of award, just for the inevitable pointing out of 'Yeah you realize she thinks anyone outed as gay could be fired because no one wants to work with a faggot, and she thinks all real men would agree.'

I'd love to see how those solid principles weather that particular storm.

Mike said...

I thought it was actually pretty funny. It's all but a recognition that the tradcons and alt-right have scooped up almost all of their allies who didn't go join the left.

Crude said...

I will say, I'm sympathetic enough to find the W4 case to be one of real regret. I think what did them in - and what did many in - was that their preferred way of handling right-wing disagreements is to sneer, and attempt a tar and feathering. This worked in the past (see Buchanan, see Coulter, etc), and they wanted it to work this one time, more than they ever wanted it before. Even when it became clear that this was not going to work, they kept at it, probably in part because they figured that at LEAST Trump would lose in the general election, and they could ride back into moral authority on the back of an I Told You So.

Which didn't happen. Now they've got a track record of unmitigated hostility and disdain towards the insurgent right, so what else can they do? If they finally back off and admit 'Maybe you guys have valid complaints, or even valid points, or - worst of all - valid wants', they would be eating massive crow. And they would be doing so in order to have to deal with people they hate (irrationally, in some cases) and treat them as, if nothing else, legitimate conversation partners.

Who can't even get them jobs or on TV or quoted in a respectable newspaper!